On 11 Mar 07, at 5:57 PM 11 Mar 07, Brett Porter wrote:
On 11/03/2007, at 9:46 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
On 11 Mar 07, at 1:56 AM 11 Mar 07, TslH wrote:
Hi,
(first of all, please forgive my low-level in english)
I'm currently looking into the maven website. If I hadn't make
mistake, there's no branches of the site for the different release.
Isn't there a way to improve the website coherency?
Yes, I think by someone being accountable and the site undergoing
release plans like all the other artifacts that we have.
s/someone/everyone/
No, I mean someone. Everyone does virtually nothing which has
generally been the case with the entire history of our site apart
from the time when Peter Kazmier took responsibility and it was when
we had the best documentation for Maven that has ever existed.
It's really not that hard - you make a code change, you update the
site. Every time. I've certainly been slack in the past, but it's
an easy thing to do, so I'll commit to doing it in the future.
Might not be that hard but has never been done consistently. CXF has
a person dedicated to documentation and so does the Geronimo team.
They are employees but I think it results in better documentation
overall. If we want professional documentation then it requires a
professional effort. I would contribute toward paid work on the site.
Jason.
The site in its current structure is not versioned, so there's no
real point to having it released - it should be constantly updated.
This was because we couldn't afford the luxury of waiting for a
release to push up new documentation because the documentation for
the current release is not complete. I'd be happy to move to a
versioned structure for documentation from 2.1 onwards, but it'll
require a large volume of documentation to be written first. Which
is easy enough if every change or new feature for 2.1 updates/
writes the according doc.
The only place I see the need for an individual to step up is for a
periodic review of the site to ensure it is still coherent across
the various pieces (this would be done at the 2.x releases, not the
2.0.x ones).
So, we have a mix of release 2.0.3, 2.0.4 and 2.0.5 in the website.
That doesn't reflect the global professionalism of the maven
development.
It's true, and it's a valid observation.
If it's just the versions, then yes - but as far as the
documentation goes I'd say the current site is applicable to every
version of Maven 2.0, unless otherwise stated (eg, mirrorOf).
Which, surprisingly, is as it should be for point releases :)
Cheers,
Brett
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
